On Tue, 17 Dec 2024 08:04:17 GMT, Alan Bateman <al...@openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Thank you Lance for the review. Alan, is it OK to proceed with this current 
>> change or do you think we should pursue the `REPLACE_EXISTING` option here?
>
> I don't object to what you have, it's the mixing of old and new APIs that 
> jumped out. Maybe some day there will be some wider updates to the jar tool 
> in this area, e.g. it could have use a temp directory rather than a temp file.

Thank you for that input, Alan. I'll go ahead with integrating this current PR. 
As a separate activity, I will take a broader look at this jar tool code and 
see what changes can be accomodated to modernize the code.

-------------

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22734#discussion_r1888252256

Reply via email to